CDZ Robert E. Lee is Not Our Heritage

[Picaro]

There's a reason the Civil War is also called "The war of Northern aggression"

They could not do without our resources.

Lincoln did a lot of un-American things.

The irony is he in no way wanted to destroy the southern economy; the whole point of the war was to tax it to finance the subsidies and corporate welfare that would entirely benefit the northern states. If he had lived, he most likely would have been impeached by his own 'supporters'; they impeached Andrew Johnson precisely because he intended to follow Lincoln's plans for post-war legislation.

 

[MaryL]

Makes me wonder, all the people protesting at Charlotte, how many were locals, how many were outside agitators? I have the sense that it wasn't locals.

Well, it's distinction without a difference now; since the Democrats now can recruit paid thugs via targeted areas by ads on Craig's List and the like, they can find 'local' vermin and claim a veneer of it being a 'local' thing while the money can of come from anywhere in the world now.

I have noticed how the "Media" picks up on liberal politically correct popular issues and practically obsess on them, and that isn't the sign of healthy and fair balanced press. We all need to back off the politics and look at the facts. All of US.

You know, you're one that it's kind of hard to pin down where you're coming from.

I look at the facts, I don't care about politics anymore.

 

[Picaro]

Robert E. Lee is the South's heritage. He was a good and honorable man.

I know there's no first hand witnesses to this, but I guarantee, there's people who heard what their elders were witness to.

Yes, well, 'denouncing slavery' in 2017 has all the gravitas and relevance of denouncing the Hittites or the Zulus. These fashion victims would in all likelihood would still be 'fashionable' if they lived back in those times, i.e. racists and establishment suck ups, so their weird notion they get to claim some sort of moral authority is just ridiculous idiocy, a total non-starter.

Seriously, they're equivalent to the "Loyalists".

The Founding Fathers never wanted slavery to continue.

According to their political speeches; their actions clearly demonstrate otherwise; blacks were never actually free in any northern state. They did away with statutory slavery purely for economic reasons; it wasn't viable for seasonal industries based on manufacturing and short growing seasons. In Lincoln's own state of Illnois, it was impossible for a black person to make a legal living, plus they had 'debt slavery', a distinction without a difference.

Most educated people back then were fully aware of the geographical limitations of slavery, but this didn't prevent them from making up fake news in order to manipulate immigrants and their votes. Whether slavery was allowed in the new territories or not was a non-issue, it was already self-limiting, which was Webster's and Polk's points re the deadlock over the Wilmot Proviso. Jefferson Davis and John Freemont were also fully aware of the facts, so was Lincoln and every other politician on any side. It was about railroad and canal subsidies for northern states, protective tariffs for big business in the northern states.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Makes me wonder, all the people protesting at Charlotte, how many were locals, how many were outside agitators? I have the sense that it wasn't locals.

Well, it's distinction without a difference now; since the Democrats now can recruit paid thugs via targeted areas by ads on Craig's List and the like, they can find 'local' vermin and claim a veneer of it being a 'local' thing while the money can of come from anywhere in the world now.

I have noticed how the "Media" picks up on liberal politically correct popular issues and practically obsess on them, and that isn't the sign of healthy and fair balanced press. We all need to back off the politics and look at the facts. All of US.

You know, you're one that it's kind of hard to pin down where you're coming from.

I look at the facts, I don't care about politics anymore.

So, what's your opinion of the left trying to erase history?

 

[MaryL]

Lincoln was conflicted on Negroes, he naively thought they would all en mass, self deport back to Africa after the war. Lincoln himself was a white supremacist. Look it up. The irony here makes me speechless.

 

[Cole]

There is a statute in Ohio from the Civil War that is our heritage. You can see it here: 4th amendment rooted in county « Harrison News Herald. America was founded on the belief that all men are created equal, it took a while to achieve that and some may say we still aren't there. Let's not go backward. White nationalists, white supremacists, the alt-right, and neo-Nazis do not represent the heritage that is America. The confederacy sought to destroy our heritage as Americans not support it, that much should be clear. Over six hundred thousand died to maintain America's dream of equality for all. Created is the word. That as far as goes . After birth comes the fact. Then you have to make it on your own !

"It is a ‘white man’s government,’ is it? Why, the very first blood shed for the assertion of your independence and the establishment of your nationality, upon the field of Lexington, was the blood of a black citizen of Massachusetts. And when they came to the work, after the victory had been achieved, and the independence of the nation acknowledged, of organizing a constitutional government of the United States, in a majority of the States of the Union the black men voted with white men, and the man who denies it is simply ignorant of the history of his own country. . . .

Your armies bore witness that 175,000 of the black population, made free by the proclamation of liberty, were in the army of the republic. When you consider that the majority of the black population were the slaves of rebels, and within their territory, unable to signify to the United States Government their unwillingness to serve it, the fact that as large a population of the black population as of the free whites rushed to the defense of your flag, speaks well for their patriotism. . . "

Source: Balkinization, 'John Bingham on Racial Equality' Gerard N. Magliocca

"Bingham lived two more years and died in Cadiz on March 19, 1900. Bingham was interred in Union Cemetery in Cadiz. In 1901, the citizens of Harrison County, Ohio erected a bronze statue honoring Bingham in Cadiz." | Ohio Civil War Central

And there is a history and a heritage and it is not one we should be proud of.

"There is a crucial difference between leaders like Washington and Jefferson, imperfect men who helped create the United States, Ms. Gordon-Reed said, and Confederate generals like Jackson and Lee, whose main historical significance is that they took up arms against it. The comparison, she added, also “misapprehends the moral problem with the Confederacy.”" Historians Question Trump’s Comments on Confederate Monuments

"“We would not want to whitewash our history by pretending that Jim Crow and disenfranchisement or massive resistance to the civil rights movement never happened,” he said. “That is the part of our history that these monuments testify to.”" [from above]

States rights my....

John Bingham and the Story of American Liberty: The Lost Cause Meets the 'Lost Clause' John Bingham and the Story of American Liberty: The Lost Cause Meets the 'Lost Clause' by Michael Kent Curtis :: SSRN

I Studied the Alt-Right So You Don’t Have To: I Studied the Alt-Right So You Don’t Have To – Form and Resonance – Medium


"Education is dangerous - every educated person is a future enemy." Hermann Goering

"Passionate hatred can give meaning and purpose to an empty life. Thus people haunted by the purposelessness of their lives try to find a new content not only by dedicating themselves to a holy cause but also by nursing a fanatical grievance." Eric Hoffer

 

[MaryL]

Makes me wonder, all the people protesting at Charlotte, how many were locals, how many were outside agitators? I have the sense that it wasn't locals.

Well, it's distinction without a difference now; since the Democrats now can recruit paid thugs via targeted areas by ads on Craig's List and the like, they can find 'local' vermin and claim a veneer of it being a 'local' thing while the money can of come from anywhere in the world now.

I have noticed how the "Media" picks up on liberal politically correct popular issues and practically obsess on them, and that isn't the sign of healthy and fair balanced press. We all need to back off the politics and look at the facts. All of US.

You know, you're one that it's kind of hard to pin down where you're coming from.

I look at the facts, I don't care about politics anymore.

So, what's your opinion of the left trying to erase history?

I opined on that already, it's disgusting. It's conformist group think and it's a fad. I already said so. Modern libs scare the poo out of me, more than the KKK or even ISIS. They violate evey ideal or precept of liberalism. THAT is where I am coming from.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Well, it's distinction without a difference now; since the Democrats now can recruit paid thugs via targeted areas by ads on Craig's List and the like, they can find 'local' vermin and claim a veneer of it being a 'local' thing while the money can of come from anywhere in the world now.

I have noticed how the "Media" picks up on liberal politically correct popular issues and practically obsess on them, and that isn't the sign of healthy and fair balanced press. We all need to back off the politics and look at the facts. All of US.

You know, you're one that it's kind of hard to pin down where you're coming from.

I look at the facts, I don't care about politics anymore.

So, what's your opinion of the left trying to erase history?

I opined on that already, it's disgusting. It's conformist group think and it's a fad. I already said so. Modern libs scare the poo out of me, more than the KKK or even ISIS. They violate evey ideal or precept of liberalism. THAT is where I am coming from.

I agree, I think that if they want to push the issue, there should be repercussions.

Trying to erase history is egregious bullshit.

 

[MaryL]

Lets tear down all statues every were. Let's remove the Washington monument. Washington was a rebel and a traitor (against England, he was a commissioned officer in the English Army sworn to protect the crown), he was a slave owner and a tax evader to the crown. When you put it THAT way. England also wanted to end slavery too, which our historians don't like to mention. Canada ended slavery and became willing members of the Empire and I can't fault that.

 

[Dale Smith]

"Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her." John 8:7

Equivalence is the only argument the conservatives and right have in their basket of apologetic tricks. Once you had a bad thought so obviously you are equivalent to the worst racist or in this case slave owners who wanted to destroy the United States. When you can excuse behaviors or history so easily all evil becomes acceptable. Jesus's injunction on judging Mary Magdalene points to the ambiguity of judgments. Judge not lest.... So then how does the person the society, the nation teach or learn? It is quite easy, not all actions are equivalent, there is context and there is moral progress.

But to answer the States rights nonsense, see below.

States Rights apologies - The Civil War was over Slavery

A few documents and sources about a topic that constantly finds apologists and revisionists. This will be a work in progress as new sources of information are found.

"I can testify about the South under oath. I was born and raised there, and 12 men in my family fought for the Confederacy; two of them were killed. And since I was a boy, the answer I’ve heard to this question, from Virginia to Louisiana (from whites, never from blacks), is this: “The War Between the States was about states’ rights. It was not about slavery.”

I’ve heard it from women and from men, from sober people and from people liquored up on anti-Washington talk. The North wouldn’t let us govern ourselves, they say, and Congress laid on tariffs that hurt the South. So we rebelled. Secession and the Civil War, in other words, were about small government, limited federal powers and states’ rights.

But a look through the declaration of causes written by South Carolina and four of the 10 states that followed it out of the Union — which, taken together, paint a kind of self-portrait of the Confederacy — reveals a different story. From Georgia to Texas, each state said the reason it was getting out was that the awful Northern states were threatening to do away with slavery." Opinion | Gone With the Myths


"Her conclusion is that the Americans who fought the Civil War overwhelmingly thought they were fighting about slavery, and that we should take their word for it."

"In this unprecedented account, Chandra Manning uses letters, diaries, and regimental newspapers to take the reader inside the minds of Civil War soldiers-black and white, Northern and Southern-as they fought and marched across a divided country. With stunning poise and narrative verve, Manning explores how the Union and Confederate soldiers came to identify slavery as the central issue of the war and what that meant for a tumultuous nation. This is a brilliant and eye-opening debut and an invaluable addition to our understanding of the Civil War as it has never been rendered before." What This Cruel War Was Over by Chandra Manning | PenguinRandomHouse.com


"In citing slavery, South Carolina was less an outlier than a leader, setting the tone for other states, including Mississippi:

'Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin...."

What This Cruel War Was Over


"Benjamin Franklin, in a 1773 letter to Dean Woodward, confirmed that whenever the Americans had attempted to end slavery, the British government had indeed thwarted those attempts. Franklin explained that . . . . a disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty, and that even the Virginia Assembly have petitioned the King for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed. " WallBuilders - Issues and Articles - The Founding Fathers and Slavery

Southern arguments for and against: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/86991/southern_arguments_for_and_against.html?cat=37

Argument v Lincoln's position: http://apollo3.com/~jameso/secession.html

Does the constitution allow secession: Does the Constitution Permit the Blue States to Secede? | FindLaw

AmericanHeritage.com / How the North Lost the Civil War


SCOTUS ruling on secession: Texas v. White

Admission of state to union FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Article IV: Annotations pg. 16 of 18

"A primary element of this Southern understanding of the Constitution was the right to secede. Nowhere does the original document confer the right to detach from the Union, but Southerners still found the act "entirely legitimate under the terms of the federal Constitution” (Cook 114). Perhaps one could construe the tenth amendment to grant such a right, but Article six states that all government officials must support "this Constitution,” which runs contrary to secession (U.S. Const. 6.0.3 and Am. 10, from Gienapp 435-6). Alexander Stevens used this principle as a premise in his argument against secession (59). Yet, despite this Constitutional opposition, or at least ambivalence, to secession, South Carolina declared that it had such a right. " (from above url)

From first post. Civil War was about....

John Bingham and the Story of American Liberty: The Lost Cause Meets the 'Lost Clause' John Bingham and the Story of American Liberty: The Lost Cause Meets the 'Lost Clause' by Michael Kent Curtis :: SSRN

The alt-right

I Studied the Alt-Right So You Don’t Have To: I Studied the Alt-Right So You Don’t Have To – Form and Resonance – Medium

This speaks volumes about those like your ilk.........

 

[Mac1958]

History INCLUDES everything, people , events and topics you don't like. You may have studied history, but you don't understand it. Please. Lee is definitely part of history, let alone American provincial as much as Lincoln or John Brown or MLK or Malcolm X.

When in the world did we start trying to deny the existence of things we don't like?
.

When Marxists, who like to air brush away history of people they dont like, took over the humanities departments in almost all of our colleges and universities.

Saw that as it was happening in real time, though the 'Old Left' was far less than impressed with the vermin passing for the 'New Left', and warned about where the scum were heading; their prediction turned out to be right, and so were the 'old' liberals, like Moynihan, about the consequences of 'neo-liberalism' and radicals taking over. His predictions were also spot on.

The "New Liberals" - those who have taken over the Democratic Party - are not liberals at all.

Real liberals welcome, expect and demand freedom of expression.
.

 

[JoeB131]

The "New Liberals" - those who have taken over the Democratic Party - are not liberals at all.

Real liberals welcome, expect and demand freedom of expression.

I heard this argument made by the ACLU in the 1970's when the Nazis wanted to march in Skokie. It was just as wrong then as it is now.

The late great Mike Royko had it right. Let the Nazis march in Skokie, but just don't have any police show up to protect them.

 

[ricechickie]

Robert E Lee himself said he wanted no notice for himself after the war. He said it's time to accept the outcome and to the South he said "Raise up your children as Americans". HE understood it was over and time to move on. He wanted no statues of him and would be appalled that all this violence is because of statues erected by people of him that he would have rejected.

Most of these people in the South that claim 'heritage' don't know the history of the civil war.

In my opinion, that right there makes him more worthy of a statue.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The "New Liberals" - those who have taken over the Democratic Party - are not liberals at all.
Real liberals welcome, expect and demand freedom of expression.
.

The Reality we live in today is that every major city controlled by the Democratic Party, that party is run by these Marxists posing as liberals and they are a threat to our nations peace and well being.

 

[SeaGal]

When in the world did we start trying to deny the existence of things we don't like?
.

Since the beginning of time. To destroy reminders of the past in works of art and literature is very ISIS and Taliban and Mao and Lenin worthy...and before them the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Moors, the Catholic church. What's next?...labeling disagree speech as hate speech?...demonizing/punishing those with whom we disagree?

Isn't it interesting that the 14th and 15th amendments still excluded women from having the right to vote? Perhaps us gals should campaign to have all the statues of men who served in government or the military prior to 1920 removed from the public square. MLK was against same-sex marriage, so were many political and religious leaders - maybe their statues should be removed too. Slaves had no rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?...neither do unborn babes. Americans of Japanese or Chinese descent can certainly find something to rally against. Columbus was Latino and stupid Custer served in the Union Army and met his well deserved fate at the Little Big Horn. The myth of the noble 'savage' is revealed by history - they were invaders and warriors - engaging in slavery and massacres of the enemy. Does anyone really believe that they only developed weapons of war after Columbus discovered the new world?

My point being - we can all find a cause to rally the mob and attempt to destroy, shout down or rewrite history. The removal of statues differs little from burning or banning books...it is the refuge of the uninformed and/or the fanatic follower. Saints preserve us from the self-righteous practitioners of political correctness. The founders made an attempt to do that, within the world they lived in, as imperfect as it is. History is messy - we should remember that.

 

[Mac1958]

When in the world did we start trying to deny the existence of things we don't like?
.

Since the beginning of time. To destroy reminders of the past in works of art and literature is very ISIS and Taliban and Mao and Lenin worthy...and before them the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Moors, the Catholic church. What's next?...labeling disagree speech as hate speech?...demonizing/punishing those with whom we disagree?

Isn't it interesting that the 14th and 15th amendments still excluded women from having the right to vote? Perhaps us gals should campaign to have all the statues of men who served in government or the military prior to 1920 removed from the public square. MLK was against same-sex marriage, so were many political and religious leaders - maybe their statues should be removed too. Slaves had no rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?...neither do unborn babes. Americans of Japanese or Chinese descent can certainly find something to rally against. Columbus was Latino and stupid Custer served in the Union Army and met his well deserved fate at the Little Big Horn. The myth of the noble 'savage' is revealed by history - they were invaders and warriors - engaging in slavery and massacres of the enemy. Does anyone really believe that they only developed weapons of war after Columbus discovered the new world?

My point being - we can all find a cause to rally the mob and attempt to destroy, shout down or rewrite history. The removal of statues differs little from burning or banning books...it is the refuge of the uninformed and/or the fanatic follower. Saints preserve us from the self-righteous practitioners of political correctness. The founders made an attempt to do that, within the world they lived in, as imperfect as it is. History is messy - we should remember that.

Agreed, and this is more about political opportunism than anything else. Those who are consumed by Identity Politics see Trump as their best opportunity, probably ever, for increased political advantage and they're going all out. This will get more ugly.
.

 

[SeaGal]

Agreed, and this is more about political opportunism than anything else. Those who are consumed by Identity Politics see Trump as their best opportunity, probably ever, for increased political advantage and they're going all out. This will get more ugly.
.

Yes - Identity Politics is a powerful tool for those who seek to keep their power, privilege and relevancy. The irony - we just finished 8 years with a president who blithely ruled by pen and phone...how many statues did he have removed, I wonder?

According to some reports the majority of 'history eradicators/statue destroyers' are white leftists, the totalitarians of our time masquerading as 'progressives'. It is the tactic of totalitarians to 'stir up' common folk with promises of great reward or retribution - seldom, if ever, have those promises been kept...because they've never been made with sincerity, or based in reality.

I do honor peaceful rallies, for and against. I support swift law enforcement intervention when violence break out. It's ok to debate this, hopefully we can all learn from it. I support dissenting voices being heard on college campuses, too. But there is so much more that we as a nation are facing...and as important as it may be to some, this is merely a diversion. We are Americans first and Lee, Beauregard and others are a part of our history. The rest of the world sees us as Americans - that is our shared culture and it is readily recognized in foreign lands.

Americans stand out to foreign eyes - not for our skin color or religion - but as citizens of the USA. We are more alike than we like to think...as are our experiences.

ps - Whatever else Trump may or may not be - he is the antithesis of the establishment (the parasitic class) - thankfully. But the parasites are fighting for their lives - even if it means destroying the host.

 

[ricechickie]

Robert E Lee himself said he wanted no notice for himself after the war. He said it's time to accept the outcome and to the South he said "Raise up your children as Americans". HE understood it was over and time to move on. He wanted no statues of him and would be appalled that all this violence is because of statues erected by people of him that he would have rejected.

Most of these people in the South that claim 'heritage' don't know the history of the civil war.

In my opinion, that right there makes him more worthy of a statue.

And you would ignore HIS wishes because of your politics.

Ummm...no.

Just a comment about how my respect for him has increased. I couldn't give two goddamns whether the statue stays or goes.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Robert E Lee himself said he wanted no notice for himself after the war. He said it's time to accept the outcome and to the South he said "Raise up your children as Americans". HE understood it was over and time to move on. He wanted no statues of him and would be appalled that all this violence is because of statues erected by people of him that he would have rejected.

Most of these people in the South that claim 'heritage' don't know the history of the civil war.

In my opinion, that right there makes him more worthy of a statue.

And you would ignore HIS wishes because of your politics.

Ummm...no.

Just a comment about how my respect for him has increased. I couldn't give two goddamns whether the statue stays or goes.

Fair enough, I deleted my post earlier. It's early and I'm still seeing with one eye!

 

[Slash]

The Supreme Court never even heard a case on whether secession was legal or not, so that's a non-argument. The reason why is that nobody ever brought such a case, certainly not Buchanan or Lincoln, which was the proper procedure, but of course the reasons no one ever brought such a case before the Court was because no one was stupid enough to bring one, since it wasn't illegal and was never considered to be illegal, and there is some 70 years of history before 1860 that clearly demonstrate nobody thought it was illegal, not even Lincoln, or he would have brought suit.

But, the cognitive dissonance is amusing that someone would cite a Court case that had nothing to do with the legality of secession as an appeal to higher authority, to a Court that also ruled slavery was legal, Dred Scott, etc., etc..

Yes they did. Makingup falsehoods doesn't make your point.

The Supreme court ruled in Texas vs. White that secession was illegal. That was the burden of proof on them in the case. Their ruling was that hat the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null"

The entire reason that case went to the Supreme court is it relied on whether it was a legal secession or a rebellion.